Madam, - It is going to be very interesting to see the family photo of the No to the EU Lisbon Treaty Campaign. From a political perspective, from left to right, we will have the Communist Party of Ireland, Gerry Adams of Sinn Féin, Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party, Declan Ganley of the Libertas grouping and Jean Marie Le Pen. It is certainly appropriate to say that this is a very colourful arrangement.
Is there any chance this grouping could go out to California shortly on a trade mission and explain to the top American executives of multinational companies based in Silicon Valley why a No vote will be a good thing for the Irish economy and for future American investment opportunities for our country? Or if this group could not do this, could they drop down to the executives of all the companies based in the Financial Services Centre in the Dublin docklands and tell them why a No vote is the best way forward for the Irish economy? Declan Ganley and the Libertas grouping want to smash up the Common Agricultural Policy, which Libertas has described as a weapon of mass destruction.
This is not a great message to sell to Irish farmers who receive €1.7 billion a year from the EU under the Cap.
If Gerry Adams and Declan Ganley win this referendum, I fear for the fall-out for our country from an investment viewpoint. Gerry Adams will have won the economic argument and the EU debate. He will win the high moral ground.
I see last week that Áine Ní Chonaill of the Immigration Control Platform has also come out calling for a No Vote.
Need I go on? - Yours, etc,
EAMONN FARRELL, Kells, Co Meath.
Madam, - In the course of the latest in a series of personalised attacks on supporters of the Lisbon Treaty, Libertas have demanded that Gay Mitchell MEP should "stick to the facts of this treaty, and avoid the politics" (Letters, March 28th). It would appear that the Easter break extended into Tuesday of last week at the Libertas office, since they appear to have missed out the excellent contribution, of over 1,000 words, which Mr Mitchell made to your newspaper on the facts of Lisbon on that day ( Irish Times,March 25th).
In addition, Libertas insists that the group are "in communication with the Standards in Public Office Commission, and are totally compliant with the relevant legislation". The leader of the group, Declan Ganley, told your newspaper recently that they have not received any individual donations higher than €5,000 ( Irish Times, March 13th).
And yet they are in a position to fund two offices - one of which is in a prime Dublin location - several members of staff, a national billboard campaign and the distribution of leaflets to 1.8 million households across the country.
The Progressive Democrats ran their election campaign on a similar scale last year, and it cost them over €1 million ( Irish Times, December 14th, 2007). And yet Libertas tell us they can achieve the same kind of campaign by taking small donations from its "several hundred" supporters? Madam, if Libertas achieve this, it would truly be the political equivalent of the feeding of the 5,000. The SIPO report into their activities should make for interesting reading. - Yours, etc,
BARRY WALSH, Brooklawn, Clontarf, Dublin 3.
Madam, - Your Security Analyst, Tom Clonan, writes (March 27th) that if we vote Yes to the Lisbon Treaty that it "would guarantee Ireland's ability to veto any future common defence concept - or indeed any EU military mission or operation that Ireland deemed inappropriate".
Does he expect a country that allowed its airports to be used to prosecute an illegal invasion of another country and that continues to let its facilities be used for the rendition of kidnapped prisoners for torture to stand up to the rest of Europe?
Surely he is aware that that would require a government with a strong moral sense.
Even more worryingly, Dr Clonan goes on to state that a Yes vote will "commit the EU to considering a wider suite of options than has been stated in previous treaties and summits. This would in theory allow the EU to take robust and rapid action independent of Nato and the US to combat threats of genocide, terrorism or criminality within its sphere of influence".
Note the use of the word "threat" and the omission of any UN mandate for these "robust and rapid actions".
Dr Clonan should know from his military studies that engaging in such action is illegal. No country may go to war without UN approval except in the case outlined by Article 51 of the UN Charter. It states that:
"Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security."
At the Nuremberg trials, the principles of international law identified by the tribunal and subsequently accepted unanimously by the General Assembly of the United Nations stated "that to initiate a war of aggression. . . is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime".
Let there be no doubt that there is every willingness on the part of the vast majority of EU states to engage in such crimes, although they will be dressed up as "humanitarian interventions".
Voting Yes will further facilitate these types of crimes. - Yours, etc,
DERMOT DONNELLY, Lieut Col (Retd), Balbriggan, Co Dublin.